vowinckel-psychologicaltime

Balanced Time Perspectives and Mindfulness

Universiteit Twente Faculty of Behavioral Sciences

Jonte Vowinckel

Mental Health Promotion Supervised by E. T. Bohlmeijer and G. J. Westerhof

August 2012

Abstract

The individual construction of psychological time is a fundamental key factor of the individual

construction of reality. Individual differences among psychological relations to time are a

measurable variable, since philosophers and psychologists succeeded in developing the construct of

Time Perspective (TP). The question of which TP is the most health-promoting led to the idea of a

Balanced Time Perspective (BTP). This study compares the components of the two most important

questionnaires measuring BTP, for correlations to Mindfulness and Life Satisfaction. 124

respondents completed the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI: Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999),

the Balanced Time Perspective Scale (BTPS: Webster, 2011), the Five Facet Mindfulness

Questionnaire - Short Form (FFMQ-SF: Bohlmeijer, ten Klooster, Fledderus, Veehof, & Baer,

2011) and the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS: Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985).

Another 33 respondents who recently finished a Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction (MBSR)

program completed the BTPS, the FFMQ-SF and the SWLS. The scores of the MBSR-condition

were compared to a control group. The MBSR- condition did not score significantly higher on the

BTPS than the control group. Comparing the ZTPI and the BTPS it turned out that when using the

deviation of a balanced time perspective coefficient (DBTP) to calculate BTP, a new combination

of subscales taken from the ZTPI and the BTPS (replacing the Zimbardo future scale with the

Webster future scale) led to higher correlations of BTP with mindfulness and life satisfaction.

Correlations between TPs and facets of mindfulness are reported.

2

1. Introduction

Since the interpretation of a broad range of phenomena related to physical time turned out to be

extensively dependent on the conditions of their circumstances, time is announced to be 'relative'

(Einstein, 1905). But even before the relativity of time was addressed by physics, its subjective

character was emphasized from a psychological viewpoint (James, 1890). According to Kant

(1781), time serves from the beginning of one's life as a basic mental category, structuring the

phenomena of the world. Its presence is 'a priori', which means it is not a result of experience but

the other way around: Our ability to gain experience presupposes our ability to recognize or

postulate time. However, experience, in turn, by the means of nurture, enculturation, and personal

life background, also influences and shapes our attitudes towards time.

This work, considering the seemingly infinite complexity of the topic, will neither engage in

philosophical discussions about the nature of time, nor will it address the cognitive, emotional,

social or cultural mechanisms involved in genesis and evolvement of people's different relations to

time. Instead, this study entirely focuses on the most recent research done on the constructs of

mindfulness, time perspective (TP) and some closely related constructs with the construct of a

balanced time perspective (BTP) being the focal point of attention. Lewin (1951) defined TP as 'the

totality of the individual's views of psychological future and psychological past existing at a given

time.' (p.75, cited in Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). This definition reflects the continuum-like,

intertwined relationship, past, future and present engage in.

Again considering the complexity of (psychological) time, it is not astonishing that a huge

corpus of work focusing on one particular aspect of time, concerning either the past, the present or

the future, is contrastingly accompanied by very few holistic approaches, applying a

multidimensional view on psychological time. There is much work done on the implications of

future orientation (e.g., Dickey, 1975; Trommsdorff, Lamm, & Schmidt, 1978; Szpunar, 2010) as

well as on the psychological implications of how people reflect on and deal with their past (e.g.,

Webster & Cappeliez, 1993; Webster, 1998; Cappeliez, O’Rourke, & Chaudhury, 2005; Bryant,

Smart, & King, 2005; Webster, Bohlmeijer, & Westerhof, 2010). Nevertheless, holistic approaches,

aiming at addressing the three time zones simultaneously are rare. One promising multidimensional

approach of operationalizing people's personal relation to time and aiming at pointing out individual

differences, has been accomplished by Zimbardo and Boyd (1999). Zimbardo and Boyd developed

the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI), an instrument which allows characterizing and

categorizing people on basis of their relation to time, described as TP.

TP, according to Zimbardo and Boyd (1999), measured with the ZTPI, is seen as a 'relatively

stable mental framework' that is constituted by the five sub-constructs past negative (PN), past

3

positive (PP), present hedonistic (PH), present fatalistic (PF) and future (F). PN represents an

aversive, pessimistic view on one’s past that interprets it as being filled with many unpleasant

experiences. PP describes an often sentimental and nostalgic, warm, affectionate, friendly view of

the past (Boniwell & Zimbardo, 2004). PH represents an attitude that strives after immediate

satisfaction of desires, without caring too much for future consequences. PF is characterized by the

belief that one’s life is controlled by spiritual or governmental forces (Boniwell & Zimbardo, 2004)

and that the future is determined by the means of fate and consequently unaffected by individual

actions taken in the present. In contrast to PH, F represents an attitude that aims at accomplishing

long-term goals at the expense of enjoying the present too excessively. People differ in their TP,

according to their individual composition of the five time frames, with some being more influential

on the subject's life than the others. TP is announced to function as a mediator between personality

traits and life satisfaction (Zhang, Ryan, & Howell, 2011). Numerous psychological, as well as

behavioral implications have been associated to the five time frames.

1.1 The 5 Time Frames of the ZTPI

A hedonistic approach to the present has its advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand a

strong present hedonistic (PH) time frame is associated with novelty seeking and creativity

(Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999) and maybe also with social connectivity (Zimbardo & Boyd, 2008). On

the other hand a hedonistic present approach is associated to risky driving (Zimbardo, Keough, &

Boyd, 1997), substance-abuse (e.g. Strathman, Gleicher, Boninger, & Edwards, 1994), chronic

homelessness (Epel, Bandura, & Zimbardo, 1999) and a tendency to engage in unsafe sex practices

(Rothspan & Read, 1996). Immediate satisfaction of desire without concerning future consequences

might be typical for a PH bias.

In contrast to PH, the future (F) time frame correlates with conscientiousness (Zimbardo &

Boyd, 1999; Zhang et al., 2011), ego control, hours of studying per week (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999)

and health-promoting behavior such as participation in a breast cancer screening program (Guarino,

De Pascalis, & Di Chiacchio, 1999). A possible drawback of a strong future orientation is

minimizing the need for social connections and underestimating the worth of 'occasional self

indulgence' (Boniwell & Zimbardo, 2004: 169). The F time frame might also be correlated to

academic achievement (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). It can be assumed that this future scale measures

a conscientious, duteous attitude toward the future, since individuals scoring high on F are

‘suppressing the reality of the present for the imagined reality of an idealized future world’

(Boniwell & Zimbardo, 2004: 169).

4

A negative relation to one’s past has a negative impact on (psychological) health. Past negative

(PN) positively correlates with neuroticism (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999; Zhang et al., 2011), trait

anxiety, aggression and depression (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999) and negatively with subjective

happiness (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999; Drake, Duncan, Sutherland, Abernethy, & Henry, 2008;

Zhang, Howell, & Stolarski, 2012) and life satisfaction (Zhang et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2012).

Individuals with a high PN score tend to be strongly represented in drug rehabilitation programs

(Klingeman, 2001), accompanied by people scoring high on PH.

A positive relation to one's past positively correlates with emotional intelligence (Stolarski,

Bitner, & Zimbardo, 2011), life satisfaction (Zhang et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2012), and subjective

happiness (Drake et al., 2008; Zhang et al., 2012).

The present fatalistic (PF) time frame correlates positively with depression, anxiety and

aggression and negatively with consideration of future consequences (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999).

1.2 The Present in the ZTPI and Mindfulness

The Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) lacks a present related subscale representing

characteristics of mindfulness, which is a mental state characterized by increased awareness of inner

and outer processes, accompanied by a nonjudgmental and non-reacting way of responding to

stimuli (Kabat-Zinn, 1982). Only hedonistic and fatalistic manners of relating to the present are

addressed through the ZTPI. This, considering the numerous health supporting implications of

mindfulness (Grossmann, Niemann, Schmidt, & Walach, 2004), is a shortcoming, when aiming at

defining an optimal health promoting architecture of time perspective (TP). Mindfulness correlates

with life satisfaction and self-esteem (e.g. Brown & Ryan, 2003). Furthermore, mindfulness is

effective in the treatment of depression, anxiety, psychosis, borderline personality disorder and

suicidal behavior (Ivanovski & Mahli, 2007).

Baer, Smith, Hopkins, Krietemeyer and Toney (2006) developed the five-facetted construct of

mindfulness that contains the facets of non-judging of inner experience, non-reactivity to inner

experience, observing, describing and acting with awareness. These skills indicate a high state of

consciousness that is characterized by an increased awareness of inner and outer processes, while

remaining self-determined and not being driven by positive or negative sensations.

Since firstly, mindfulness is often referred to as the 'feeling of being fully present and alive in

the moment' (e.g., Bishop, Lau, Shapiro, Carlson, & Anderson, 2004) and secondly it has been

linked to many health related aspects of life, we argue that mindfulness is the most appropriate

variable for measuring (the healthiness of) the individual relation to the present, and therefore it

should be more strongly represented in the measurement of TP.

5

1.3 Negative Past Perspective and the Relevance of Mindfulness

There is some evidence that the brain has a build-in predisposition to develop a 'negativity-bias'

which supports the emergence of automatically activated schemes supporting avoidance-based

behavior (Vaish, Grossman, & Woodward, 2008). Negative experiences influence the implicit

affective memory, neurologically manifested through a stable, endurable association between the

stimulus and the negative experienced emotional reaction to it, made by the amygdala (Ledoux,

1998). Fear triggering faces are more likely to be recognized than happy or neutral faces due to

them being processed very rapidly by the amygdala (Yang, Zald, & Blake, 2007). The amygdala

still gets activated, accompanied by skin conductance responses, when the fear triggering faces are

represented subliminal (Williams, Liddell, Kemp, Bryant, Maeres et al., 2006). Facing these

findings, it can be assumed that some (subconscious) mechanisms the brain works with, can abet a

development, which makes a negatively biased past perspective more likely to occur, while positive

experiences have a weaker impact on implicit memory structures. In a marriage for example, though

a sociological not a neurological context, five positive interactions are assumed to be required to

compensate for one negative interaction (Gottman, 1993; Gottman, 1994).

Mindfulness functions as an important variable in overcoming this build-in tendency to develop

a negatively biased past perspective, since mindfulness is a state of awareness which gives 'freedom

of reflexive conditioning and delusion' (Shapiro & Carlson, 2009). The construct of mindfulness

contains five facets: observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-judging of inner experience

and non-reactivity to inner experience (Baer et al., 2008).

Applying these skills successfully, one can reduce the power of the first automatically

generated negative emotional reaction to a stimulus by being able to observe it, describe it, not

judge it and not react to it. (Non-) reacting to a (negative) stimulus in this manner, relativizes its

relevance. Other more positive possible interpretations of and reactions to the stimulus can come to

consciousness and one can intentionally shift the focus onto as more positive experienced aspects.

In other words: prevalent negativity supporting patterns of automatic cognitions can become

conscious, and be counteracted through an increase in mindfulness. Albeit, the causal direction of

the relatedness, if existing, remains unclear, mindfulness correlates significantly with a negative

past perspective (Drake et al., 2008).

1.4 The Present, Mindfulness and a Balanced Time Perspective

The present is the central point of lifetime, or as Schopenhauer puts it: 'The present alone is true and

actual; it is the only time which possesses full reality, and our existence lies in it exclusively' (1890:

19). One can mentally be in one’s past or project oneself into an anticipated, desired or feared

6

future. However, the present is also always present at the same time (see also Webster, 2011). This

omnipresence of the present time zone somehow makes it the most relevant factor when describing

someone's time perspective (TP). However, the relation to the present is in turn affected by the

current kind of thinking and feeling about the past and the future, since these cognitions and

emotions are 'framing' the present.

Zimbardo introduces the concept of a balanced time perspective (BTP) and states that ‘in an

optimally balanced time perspective, the past, present and future components blend and flexibly

engage, depending on a situation’s demands and our needs and values’ (Zimbardo, 2002: 62 ). An

essential key factor for succeeding in developing a BTP is thus the skill to flexibly switch one’s

focus from one time perspective to another according to the demands of the moment. It is predicted

that mindfulness leads to improvement of sustained attention and switching flexibility of attention

(Bishop et al., 2004; De Kleine, Van de Lubbe, Blom, Schreurs, & Bohlmeijer, in prep.). The ability

to switch mindsets, such as being dominated by a certain timeframe, seems to rely mandatorily on

the sub activities, summed up by the five facets of mindfulness: observing, describing, acting with

awareness, non-judging of inner experience and non-reactivity to inner experience, since these

abilities provide the ''space' between one's perception and response' (Bishop et al., 2004: 9), and the

information about the situation, necessary for the next step, the 'reflectively (as opposed to

reflexively)' (Bishop et al., 2004: 9) evaluation of the demands of the moment.

Hence, we conclude that an instrument measuring BTP should simultaneously address the

construct of mindfulness and the relations to past and future.

1.5 Measuring Balanced Time Perspective

A balanced time perspective (BTP) is announced to be the most salubrious time perspective (TP)

(Boniwell & Zimbardo, 2004). According to Boniwell and Zimbardo (2004), a person with a BTP is

characterized by being medium present hedonistic, medium future-focused, low present fatalistic, as

well as high at the past positive and low at the past negative time frame. Operationalizing high,

medium and low scores, Drake et al. (2008) categorized respondents’ scores as close as possible to

the 33rd and 66th percentiles, providing the three categories of low, medium and high scores.

Subsequently, by applying a cut-off approach, respondents were labeled as having a BTP or not

having a BTP. Drake et al. (2008) found that people with a BTP scored higher on subjective

happiness (t (12) = 5.04, p = .001) and mindfulness (t (12) = 2.63, p = .011), compared to

respondents who could not be labeled as having a BTP. A problem with this approach is that only

very few people achieve a BTP (Drake et al., 2008; Zhang et al., 2012). Boniwell, Osin, Linley and

Ivanchenko (2010) suggested a hierarchical cluster analysis approach for distinguishing people

7

holding a BTP from people who do not. A main problem with this approach is that comparing

samples is difficult, if possible at all (Zhang et al., 2012). Stolarski, Bitner and Zimbardo (2011)

suggested the use of a Deviation Balanced Time Perspective coefficient (DBTP), which measures

the distance between an individual's TP and the by Zimbardo and Boyd (2008) suggested ideal

scores on the five subscales. A theoretically ideal score on the Zimbardo time perspective inventory

(ZTPI) that would perfectly match the suggested ideal scores would result in a DBTP score of 0.

Accordingly, instead of categorizing respondents as balanced or unbalanced, the DBTP score

indicates the ‘unbalancedness’ of a respondent. The DBTP is announced to have a higher predictive

validity than the other approaches, it is easy to calculate, and it leads to better comparability

between samples (Zhang et al., 2012). Applying this approach, Stolarski et al. (2011) found BTP to

be associated with emotional intelligence.

Webster (2011) argued that the concept of BTP is younger than the ZTPI and consequently the

ZTPI was not designed to measure it. He introduced the Balanced Time Perspective Scale (BTPS)

and had some good arguments for some advantages the BTPS has over the ZTPI, concerning social

desirability biased answer patterns, scale reliability and affect-relatedness of the items.

He also argued that the present should play a merely implicit role: The BTPS contains 28 items,

with half of them reflecting on the past and the others on the future. However, every item of the

BTPS has an implicit affective present component. Thus the present on the one hand is the most

strongly addressed time zone in the BTPS, since it plays an implicit role in every item. On the other

hand it is the least addressed time zone because it lacks an own scale for which reason it is not

measured. Webster suggested operationalizing BTP by having high scores on the two subscales of

the BTPS. He distinguished 4 categories of respondents: Reminiscers, which scores are above the

median on the past scale and below the median on the future scale, Futurists, scoring above the

median on the future scale and below the median on the past scale, time restrictives, scoring below

the median on both scales, and time expansives, scoring above the median on both subscales. The

time expansive category is the BTP category. When Webster compared the BTPS with the ZTPI

(2011) he did not take the present scales of the ZTPI into account. By leaving out the present scales,

the BTPS and the ZTPI were not tested on their differences in 'labeling' respondents as balanced or

not balanced.

Webster's BTP, defined as a ‘frequent and equal tendency to think about both one’s past and

future in positive ways’ (2011), can be described as having a positive relation to one's past and

future, in the present. Though the BTPS has no present scale, due to the present component of every

item, we expect both subscales to correlate positively with mindfulness.

8

2. Purpose

The entire field of time psychology is very young. The concept of a balanced time perspective

(BTP) is difficult to define, and though it is still in the process of being defined, there are as of now

at least two competing questionnaires to measure it. Obviously time perspective (TP) is related to

individual behavior, cognitions and emotions, and hence, severely affecting quality of life.

However, many aspects concerning the structure of the concept of a BTP, and the possibilities

regarding the purposeful redesigning of individuals' TPs, aiming at improving quality of life, remain

widely unexplored.

Mindfulness is a strong correlate of many health-related aspects of life and simultaneously it

describes a healthy relation to the present. Therefore, combining mindfulness with the field of TP

seems overdue. The subscales of the Balanced Time Perspective Scale (BTPS) and the Zimbardo

time perspective inventory (ZTPI) will be compared with regard to their correlations to life

satisfaction and mindfulness. We expect that Webster past and Webster future will correlate

positively with life satisfaction (Webster, 2011) and due to the present relatedness of the items we

further expect both scales to be positively correlated with mindfulness. We expect the same for the

Zimbardo past positive (PP) time frame. We expect past negative (PN) and present fatalistic (PF) to

be negatively correlated with life satisfaction (Zhang et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2012) and

mindfulness (Drake et al., 2008). The Zimbardo future scale (F) measures coping styles and time

management rather than an affectionate relation to one’s future, as the Webster future scale does

(Webster, 2011). We therefore assume the Zimbardo future scale to be weaker, if at all, correlated

with life satisfaction and mindfulness than the Webster future scale. We expect present hedonistic

(PH) to be positively correlated with life satisfaction. Drake et al. (2008) found PH to be slightly

negatively correlated with mindfulness. However, because the PH as well as the mindfulness scale

measure present related attitudes, a positive correlation is possible as well. Furthermore, we expect

positive correlations between the PP and the Webster past scale, as well as between the F and the

Webster future scale (Webster, 2011). We assume BTP to correlate positively with life satisfaction

and mindfulness. The concept of BTP remains unclear regarding its definition, as well as its

measurement. When, due to their health promoting character, mindfulness and life satisfaction are

considered mandatory implications of a BTP, they can function as a criterion for balancedness.

Since the labeling of people as balanced or unbalanced remains quite arbitrary, the present

study aims at addressing degrees of balancedness, instead of comparing two categories of balanced

and unbalanced people. Consequently, the DBTP technique will be used for measuring BTP with

the ZTPI.

9

We assume mindfulness to be crucial for developing and maintaining a BTP. Albeit, the

strength of the connection and the possibly existing causal direction between mindfulness and

(balanced) time perspective remains widely unknown, we assume that an increase in mindfulness in

one population will possibly be accompanied by improved relations to the past and the future.

Therefore Webster past and Webster future scores of students who completed a Mindfulness based

Stress Reduction (MBSR) training recently, will be compared to Webster past and Webster future

scores of a control group.

2.1 Research questions

(1) Are higher mindfulness scores, generated by a Mindfulness based Stress Reduction training

(MBSR), associated to higher scores on the past and/or the future scale of the Balanced Time

Perspective Scale (BTPS) compared to a control group?

(2) How are the relations between the subscales of the ZTPI and the BTPS to life satisfaction

and mindfulness (can previous findings be confirmed)?

(3) Is there an alternative composition of the 7 time frames (PP, PN, PH, PF, F, Webster Past

and Webster Future) which leads to stronger correlations of the deviant of a balanced time

perspective (DBTP) with life satisfaction and mindfulness?

3. Method

3.1 Participants

Sixty-seven women and 57 men ranging in age from 19 to 43 (M = 24.3, SD = 3.43) completed an

online version of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI), the Balanced Time Perspective

Scale (BTPS), the Five-facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ-SF) and the Satisfaction with Life

Scale (SWLS). Fifty-six respondents were native Dutch speakers and 65 were native German

speakers. The participants were students from the University of Twente (n = 100), the art academy

AKI (n =17) and the university college Saxion (n = 7), which all are located in the Dutch city of

Enschede. No reward was granted for completing the online questionnaire. Participants were

recruited through opportunity and snowball sampling. Additionally 33 psychology students, 29

women and 5 men, ranging in age between 20 and 34 (M = 23.74, SD = 3.27), who recently finished

an eight-week Mindfulness based Stress Reduction (MBSR) training program, and who had no prior

experience with meditation, completed a pen and paper version of the BTPS, the FFMQ-SF and the

SWLS. To compare the scores of the students who participated in the MBSR program, a control

10

group was taken from the main sample. The control group (n=34) was constituted by respondents

who are studying psychology for at least one and a half years, had no or very little prior experience

with meditation and would or maybe would participate in a meditation workshop which is given for

free. Participants in the treatment group were also given nominal study credits, which makes the

inclusion of 15 participants to the control group who answered with 'maybe' more justifiable.

3.2 Measures

Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory. The ZTPI (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999) is a 56-item scale

which is constituted by the five subscales of past positive (PP), past negative (PN), present

hedonistic (PH), present fatalistic (PF) and future (F). Individuals rate on a five-point Likert scale

how strongly each statement applies to them (1= very untrue of me, 5 = very true of me). Items are

‘It gives me pleasure to think about my past’ (PP), ‘Painful past experiences keep being replayed in

my mind’ (PN), ‘It is more important for me to enjoy life’s journey than to focus only on the

destination’ (PH), ‘My life path is controlled by forces I cannot influence’ (PF) and ‘I believe that a

person’s day should be planned ahead each morning’ (F). The ZTPI was the product of a continued

development over years and it has shown reliability and validity (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999).

Cronbach’s alpha in this study was .85 for PP, .79 for PN, .82 for PH, .67 for PF, and .76 for F

(n=124).

Balanced Time Perspective Scale. The BTPS (Webster, 2011) consists of 28 items, 14

addressing the past and 14 addressing the future. It has been suggested as an alternative instrument

for measuring a balanced time perspective (BTP). The respondents rate on a six-point scale how

true each statement is to them. Every item connects the addressed time zone (past or future) to the

present. Examples of items are ‘Reminiscing about my past gives me a sense of purpose in life’,

‘Remembering happier times from my past helps energize me in the present’, concerning the past

and ‘I enjoy thinking about where I’ll be a few years from now’ and ‘Achieving future dreams is

something that motivates me now’ concerning the future. Respondents can be categorized into 4

categories (Reminiscers, above the median on the past scale and below the median on the future

scale, Futurists, above the median on the future scale and below the median on the past scale, time

restrictives, below the median on both scales, and time expansives, the BTP category, above the

median on both subscales.) The BTPS showed favorable psychometric qualities (Webster, 2011).

Cronbach’s alpha in this study was .91 for the past scale and .92 for the future scale (n=124).

11

Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire – Short form. The FFMQ-SF (Bohlmeijer, ten Klooster,

Fledderus, Veehof, & Baer, 2011) is the short form of the FFMQ (Baer, Smith, Hopkins,

Krietemeyer, & Toney, 2006). It measures five facets of mindfulness: observing, describing, acting

with awareness, non-judging of inner experience and non-reactivity to inner experience. Examples

of items are ‘I notice visual elements in art or nature, such as colors, shapes, textures, or patterns

of light and shadow’ (observe), ‘I’m good at finding words to describe my feelings’ (describe), ‘I

find myself doing things without paying attention’ (reverse-coded) (acting with awareness), ‘I

disapprove of myself when I have illogical ideas’ (reverse-coded) (non-judging of inner

experience), ‘When I have distressing thoughts or images, I just notice them and let them go’ (non-

reactivity to inner experience). The FFMQ is rated on a 5-point scale with answer options ranging

from ‘1 = never or very rarely true’ to ‘5 = very often or always true’. Construct validity and

internal consistency of the FFMQ are convincing (Baer et al., 2006) and the five-factor structure

was repeatedly confirmed (e.g., Baer, Smith, Lykins, Button, Krietemeyer, & Sauer, 2008;

Fernandez, Wood, Stein, & Rossi, 2010). Recently, the excellent psychometric properties could also

be shown for the Dutch version of the FFMQ, the FFMQ-NL (Bruin, Topper, Muskens, Bögels, &

Kamphuis, 2012). The FFMQ-SF shows the same five-factor structure as the whole FFMQ, slightly

lower alpha coefficients for the subscales describing, non-judging and acting with awareness and

slightly higher alpha coefficients for observing and non-reactivity to inner experience (Bohlmeijer

et al., 2011). Furthermore, Bohlmeijer et al. (2011) reported that the FFMQ-SF showed

intercorrelations between subscales and correlations with the constructs of acceptance, openness,

neuroticism, anxiety, depression and positive mental health that were almost identical to those of

the whole FFMQ. Cronbach’s alpha in this study was .80 for the overall scale, .83 for the describe

subscale, .68 for the non-reactivity subscale, .82 for the non-judging subscale, .79 for the observe

subscale and .80 for the acting with awareness subscale (n=124).

Satisfaction with Life Scale. The SWLS (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) is an

instrument for the overall assessment of life satisfaction. It contains 5 items and in this study it was

rated on a 5-point scale. Examples of items are ‘In most ways my life is close to my ideal’ and ‘I am

satisfied with my life’. The SWLS is widely used and its reliability and validity were often

confirmed (e.g., Pavot, Diener, Colvin, & Sandvik, 1991; Pavot & Diener, 1993; Neto, 1993;

Shevlin, Brundsen, & Miles, 1998). Cronbach’s alpha in this study was .84 (n=124).

All instruments were presented in Dutch (see appendix for the Dutch version of the ZTPI used

in this study). Besides for information about age, gender, religion, native language and university,

12

participants were asked the following questions: ‘How much experience do you have with

meditation?’ (7 possible answers ranging from ‘1 = no experience at all’ to ‘7 = I meditate (almost)

every day’) and ‘Would you be interested in participating in a professional meditation workshop if

it would be offered for free?’ (possible answers were ‘yes’, ‘no’ and ‘maybe’). Participants were

informed that the whole online questionnaire (N=123) would take about 15 to 25 minutes to

complete.

4. Data Analysis

Independent t-tests were conducted to compare the global categories male/female and

Dutch/German.


(MBSR), associated to higher scores on the past and/or the future scale of the Balanced

Time Perspective Scale (BTPS) compared to a control group?

An ANOVA was carried out to test for differences between the 3 conditions (MBSR group, control

group and main sample) regarding TP, life satisfaction and mindfulness scores. To compare BTPS,

mindfulness and life satisfaction scores between the MBSR condition and the control group, an

independent samples t-test was conducted. A chi-square test of independence was done to see the

distributions of Webster category membership among conditions.



Pearson correlations were used to calculate correlations between TP subscales, life satisfaction,

mindfulness, mindfulness subscales and DBTP’s. ANOVAs were used for examining the effect of

Webster category membership on life satisfaction, mindfulness and DBTP. Regression analysis was

utilized to predict life satisfaction, mindfulness and mindfulness subscales with the 7 time frames

(PN, PP, PH, PF, F, Webster Past and Webster Future). An independent samples t-test was carried

out to compare time expansives (balanced) with reminiscers, futurists and time restrictives

(unbalanced), with respect to their scores on life satisfaction, mindfulness, DBTP and time frames.

13




The DBTP, indicating the distance to a balanced time perspective, is calculated with the following

formula:

DBTP =

According to Zimbardo and Boyd (2008), Stolarski et al. (2011) and Zhang et al. (2012) defined

optimal scores as 1.95 (PN), 4.6 (PP), 1.5 (PF), 3.9 (PH) and 4 (F). The empirical scores are

subtracted from the ideal scores. To replace F (Zimbardo Future) with WF (Webster Future), the

following formula was used:

DBTPWF =

The Webster future scale (WF) contains 14 items. To calculate the mean score, the total score was

divided by 14. One sixth was subtracted from the WF deviant to correct for the difference in answer

options between the BTPS, which is a 6-point scale, and the ZTPI, which is a 5-point scale. Without

this correction the Webster future scale would have been more strongly represented in the

DBTPWF than the 4 other time frames (past negative, past positive, present fatalistic and present

hedonistic). The optimal mean score for the WF scale was set to 5, which is the highest possible

mean score after correction for the difference in answer options between the BTPS and the ZTPI.

5. Results

5.1 Descriptive findings

An independent samples t-test was conducted to examine differences between men and women.

Women scored higher on past positive (PP), t(122) = 3.798, p < .001, as well as on future (F), t(122)

= 3.452, p = .001, and Webster past, t(122) = 2.047, p = .043. Women also had a significantly lower

DBTP, t(122) = -3.192, p = .002. An independent samples t-test was carried out to compare native

Dutch speakers with native German speakers. Native Dutch speakers scored significantly lower on

past negative (PN), t(119) = -2.917, p = .004, as well as higher on Webster future t(119) = 2.482, p

14

= .014, and higher on non-reactivity to inner experience, t(119) = 2.225, p = .028, compared to

native German speakers. There were no other significant differences between these categories.

5.2 (1) Are higher mindfulness scores, generated by a Mindfulness based Stress Reduction training

(MBSR), associated to higher scores on the past and/or the future scale of the Balanced Time

Perspective Scale (BTPS) compared to a control group?

5.2.1 TP and Mindfulness Differences among Conditions

There were no significant differences between conditions regarding TP and life satisfaction. Table 1

gives the means and standard deviations of time frame, life satisfaction and mindfulness scores for

the 3 conditions. Only for mindfulness the main effect of condition was significant, F(2, 154) =

5.591, p = .005. Post hoc tests (Bonferroni) indicated that the MBSR condition (M = 86.55, SD =

9.06) scored significantly higher on the FFMQ-SF than the control group (M = 78.65, SD = 9.64, p

= .003). However, the MBSR condition did not score significantly higher on mindfulness than the

main sample (M = 82.06, SD = 9.95). This might be due to the lower mindfulness scores of the

university students (M = 79.86, SD = 9.43), compared to those of the university college students (M

= 84, 86, SD = 5.87, ns) and the art academy students (M = 87.00, SD = 12.01, p = .017), since

university college and art academy students were only involved in the main sample.

Table 1

Means and Standard Deviations of Time Frames, Life Satisfaction, Mindfulness and DBTP Scores for the 3 Conditions

Group M LS PP PN PH PF F WP WF DBTP

Mean 1 86.6 19.2 55.7 63.9

2 78.7 18.1 3.6 3.0 3.5 2.6 3.4 56 60.2 2.3

3 82.1 18.2 3.6 2.8 3.6 2.7 3.4 54.8 63.6 2.2

SD 1 9.1 3.4 7.71 9.3

2 9.6 3.7 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.4 10.9 10.6 0.7

3 10.0 3.9 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 12.9 11.6 0.7

NOTE: Group 1 = MBSR-group (n=33); Group 2 = control group (n=34); Group 3 = main sample without control group

(n=90).

15

5.2.2 MBSR and the BTPS

There were no significant differences between the BTPS scores of the students who participated at

the MBSR program (n=33) and the control group (n=34). An independent-samples t-test was

conducted to compare Webster past (WP), Webster future (WF), life satisfaction and mindfulness

scores between the treatment- and the non-treatment group. Neither for WP, t (59.601) = -.119, p =

.906, nor for WF, t (65) = 1.541, p = .128, there was a significant difference between conditions.

The difference for life satisfaction, t (65) = 1.236, p = .221, was not significant either. The only

significant differences between the groups were found for mindfulness, t (65) = 3.453, p < .001, the

observe-subscale, t (65) = 2.026, p = .002, the describe-subscale, t (54.267) = 2.226, p = .001, the

non-judging-subscale, t (65) = 3.34, p < .001, and the non-reacting-subscale, t (65) = 2.291, p =

.001. The difference between groups for the acting-with-awareness-subscale was not significant, t

(54.858) = 0.666, p = .254. Thus, higher mindfulness scores were not associated to higher scores on

the past or the future scale of the BTPS. A chi-square test of independence was performed to

examine the relation between conditions and Webster categories. There were no significant

relations between these categories, X² (6, N=157) = 10.155, p = .118. Table 2 gives the distribution

of Webster category membership over conditions.

Table 2

Distribution of Webster Category Membership over Conditions

Reminiscers Futurists Time-Expansive Time-Restrictive

MBSR 6 (18,2%) 6 (18,2%) 12 (36,4%) 9 (27,3%)

Control 11 (32,4%) 3 (8,8%) 5 (14,7%) 15 (44,1%)

Main 13 (14,4%) 13 (14,4%) 31 (34,4%) 33 (36,7%)

NOTE: N=157.

5.3 (2) How are the relations between the subscales of the ZTPI and the BTPS to life satisfaction


5.3.1 Relations between the Time Frames of Zimbardo and Webster

As expected the highest correlation between the Webster past scale and the ZTPI, was its

correlation to the past positive (PP) subscale (r = .491, p < .001). As can be seen in Table 3, the

highest correlation between the Webster future scale with the ZTPI, was its correlation with the

future (F) scale (r = .303, p < .01). However, the Webster past scale correlated slightly stronger to F

than the Webster future scale.

16

Table 3

Internal Consistency and Correlations for Life Satisfaction, Mindfulness and Time Frames

α LS M PP PN PH PF F WP

LS .84 -

M .80 .45*** -

PP .85 .36*** .14 -

PN .79 -.45*** -.49*** -.32*** -

PH .82 .49*** .31*** .15 -.15 -

PF .67 -.06 -.21* .18* .23* .18* -

F .76 -.10 -.14 .27** .20* -.37*** -.32*** -

WP .91 .31** .22* .49*** -.02 .07 -.02 .33*** -

WF .92 .35*** .36*** .26** -.11 .18* -.23* .30** .59***

NOTE: * P < .05. ** P < .01. *** P < .001; LS = Life Satisfaction; M = Mindfulness. The internal consistency was

questionable for PF, acceptable for F and PN, good for mindfulness, PH, life satisfaction and PP, and excellent for

Webster past (WP) and Webster future (WF) (n=124).

5.3.2 Relations between Webster Categories and Zimbardo Time Frames

Table 4 gives means and standard deviations for time frames, life satisfaction, mindfulness and

DBTP scores in the 4 Webster categories. An ANOVA indicated a significant effect of Webster

category membership for past positive (PP), F(3, 120) = 8.7, p < .001; future (F), F(3, 120) = 4.736,

p = .004; and the DBTP, F(3, 120) = 6.495, p < .001. Post hoc tests (Bonferroni) demonstrated that

the time expansive category (M = 3.87, SD = 0.67) scored significantly higher on PP than the time

restrictive category (M = 3.29, SD = 0.75, p = .001). The reminiscers category (M = 4.01, SD =

0.56) also scored significantly higher on PP than the time restrictive category (p < .001). The time

expansive (M = 3.50, SD = 0.50, p = .012) and the futurists category (M = 3.54, SD = 0.70, p = .05)

scored significantly higher on the F scale than the time restrictives (M = 3.15, SD = 0.50).

Reminiscers (M = 1.91, SD = 0.52, p = .018) and time expansives (M = 2.0, SD = 0.61, p = .003)

had a significant lower DBTP than time restrictives (M = 2.51, SD = 0.68).

17

Table 4

Means and Standard Deviations of Time Frames, Life Satisfaction, Mindfulness and DBTP Scores for

Webster Categories

Group M LS PP PN PH PF F WP WF DBTP

Mean 1 81.1 18.6 4.0 2.7 3.6 2.7 3.5 62.4 58.8 1.9

2 83.3 19.2 3.6 2.8 3.5 2.4 3.5 48.4 71.1 2.2

3 86.6 19.9 3.9 2.8 3.7 2.6 3.5 67.1 73.7 2.0

4 78.8 16.8 3.3 2.9 3.4 2.7 3.2 44.8 53.5 2.5

SD 1 7.7 3.5 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.4 5.1 4.7 0.5

2 9.9 3.8 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.7 0.7 5.3 4.7 0.8

3 9.7 3.0 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 7.0 5.5 0.6

4 10.1 3.9 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.5 9.0 9.3 0.7 NOTE: Group 1 = Reminiscers (n=24); Group 2 = Futurists (n=16); Group 3 = Time Expansives (n=36); Group 4 = Time

Restrictives (n=48). (N=124).

5.3.3 The 7 time frames and life satisfaction

Significant correlations between life satisfaction and time frame were found for PP (r = .385, p <

.001), PN (r = -.452, p < .001), PH (r = .490, p < .001), Webster Past (r = .306, p < .01) and

Webster Future (r = .246, p < .001). As can be seen in Table 3, future (F) and present fatalistic (PF)

had no significant correlations to life satisfaction (F, r = -.098, ns; PF, r = -.061, ns). All 7

timeframes were tested on their strength to predict life satisfaction. Using the enter method a

significant model emerged, F(7, 116) = 15.105, p < .001. Adjusted R square = .445. All variables

are shown in Table 5.

Table 5

Significant predictors of Life Satisfaction

B SE B Beta

PP .677 .483 .126

PN -1.873 .470 -.328***

PH 2.867 .581 .392***

PF -.220 .535 -.032

F -.095 .674 -.013

WP .046 .030 .148

WF .039 .031 .115

NOTE: *** P < .001. PP = Past positive; PN = Past negative; PH = Present hedonistic; PF = Present fatalistic; F = Future;

WP = Webster past; WF = Webster future.

18

5.3.4 Balanced Time Perspective and Life Satisfaction

Both measurements of BTP were related to life satisfaction. Using the ZTPI, the DBTP, measuring

the distance to a BTP, correlated significantly with life satisfaction (r = -.449, p < .001). Using the

BTPS, the main effect of category membership was significant, F(3, 153) = 7.149, p < .001. Post

hoc tests (Bonferroni) demonstrated that the time expansive category (M = 19.85, SD = 3.00) scored

significantly higher on the SWLS than the time restrictive category (M = 16.77, SD = 3.86, p <

.001). Also, the futurists category (M = 19.23, SD = 3.83) scored significantly higher than the time

restrictive category (p < .05). The reminiscers category (M = 18.57, SD = 3.48) did not score

significantly higher or lower on life satisfaction than another category.

5.3.5 The 7 Time Frames and Mindfulness

As can be seen in Table 3, significant correlations between mindfulness and time frame were found

for PN (r = -.491, p < .001), PH (r = .311, p < .001), PF (r = -.210, p < .05), Webster Past (r = .218,

p < .05) and Webster Future (r = .364, p < .001). PP and F were not significantly correlated to

mindfulness (PP, r = .143, ns; F, r = -.135, ns). All 7 timeframes were tested on their strength to

predict mindfulness. Using the enter method a significant model emerged, F(7, 116) = 11.419, p <

.001. Adjusted R square = .372. All variables are shown in Table 6.

Table 6

Significant predictors of Mindfulness

B SE B Beta

PP -1.808 1.335 -.129

PN -6.329 1.299 -.426***

PH 3.784 1.606 .199*

PF -2.198 1.480 -.125

F -1.883 1.863 -.100

WP .129 .082 .160

WF .194 .085 .221*

NOTE: * P < .05. *** P < .001. PP = Past positive; PN = Past negative; PH = Present hedonistic; PF = Present fatalistic; F

= Future; WP = Webster past; WF = Webster future.

5.3.6 Time Perspectives and the 5 Mindfulness Subscales

Correlations between time frames and mindfulness subscales can be seen in Table 7. PN was

negatively correlated to 4 of 5 mindfulness subscales. The strongest connection between

mindfulness and PN was the correlation between PN and the non-judging-scale (r = -.609, p <

.001). Accounting for 37 percent of the variance, judging oneself and a negative evaluation of the

19

past seem to be strongly interconnected activities, though the direction of causality, if existing, is

unclear. Though most of the time frames’ significant correlations to mindfulness are either only

positive (WF, PH, WP) or negative (PF, PN), the F time frame has a more ambiguous relation to

mindfulness. It correlates negatively with the non-judging subscale (r = -.340, p < .001) and

positively with the acting with awareness subscale (r = .213, p < .05).

Table 7

Correlations between Mindfulness Subscales and Time Frames

NJ O D AWA NR

PP .02 .12 .16 .13 -.01

PN -.61*** .00 -.19* -.29** -.23*

PH .23* .28** .23** .01 .15

PF -.20* .14 -.19* -.25** -.05

F -.34*** -.04 -.08 .21* -.09

WP -.07 .17 .18* .15 .23*

WF .11 .20* .34*** .16 .26**

NOTE: * P < .05. ** P < .01. *** P < .001. NJ = Non-judging of inner experience; O = Observe; D = Describe; AWA =

Acting with awareness; NR = Non-reactivity to inner experience. PP = Past positive; PN = Past negative; PH = Present

hedonistic; PF = Present fatalistic; F = Future; WP = Webster past; WF = Webster future.

All 7 timeframes were tested on their strength to predict the non-judging facet of mindfulness.

Using the enter method a significant model emerged, F(7, 116) = 14.605, p < .001. Adjusted R

square = .436. All variables are shown in Table 8. Accounting for 44 percent of the variance time

perspectives function as a reasonable predictor of how strongly people tend to judge their inner

experience. The models for the other facets of mindfulness were weaker and therefore are not

reported here.

20

Table 8

Significant predictors of the Non-Judging Mindfulness Subscale

B SE B Beta

PP -.713 .515 -.125

PN -3.287 .501 -.543***

PH .615 .620 .080

PF -.994 .571 -.139

F -1.865 .719 -.244*

WP -.002 .032 -.006

WF .038 .033 .108

NOTE: * P < .05. *** P < .001. PP = Past positive; PN = Past negative; PH = Present hedonistic; PF = Present fatalistic; F

= Future; WP = Webster past; WF = Webster future.

5.3.7 Balanced Time Perspective and Mindfulness

Both measurements of BTP were related to mindfulness. Using the ZTPI, the DBTP correlated

significantly with mindfulness (r = -.315, p < .001). Using the BTPS, the main effect of category

membership was significant, F(3, 153) = 6.032, p = .001. Post hoc tests (Bonferroni) demonstrated

that the time expansive category (M = 86.60, SD = 9.68) scored significantly higher on the FFMQ-

SF than the time restrictive category (M = 78.81, SD = 10.13, p < .001).

5.3.8 Balanced Time Perspective (Webster)

An independent samples t-test was conducted to compare ‘balanced’ participants (time expansives)

with ‘unbalanced’ participants (reminiscers, futurists and time restrictives). Significant differences

between groups were found for mindfulness, t(155) = 3.765, p < .001, life satisfaction, t(114.46) =

3.675, p < .001, and PP, t(122) = 2.388, p = .018. Furthermore, differences were significant for

DBTP, t(122) = -2.244, p = .027, and experience with meditation, t(46.77) = 2.446, p = .018.

5.4 (3) Is there an alternative composition of the 7 time frames (PP, PN, PH, PF, F, Webster Past

and Webster Future) which leads to stronger correlations of the DBTP with life satisfaction and

mindfulness?

5.4.1 DBTP

The deviant of a balanced time perspective (DBTP), measuring the distance to a balanced time

perspective (BTP), correlated significantly with life satisfaction (r = -.449, p < .001) and

mindfulness (r = -.315, p < .001). The Zimbardo past positive scale (PP) correlated slightly stronger

21

to life satisfaction than the Webster past scale (WP). Thus if PP would be replaced by WP, the

DBTP would slightly weaker correlate to life satisfaction though stronger to mindfulness. However,

when the Zimbardo future scale (F) was replaced by the Webster future scale (WF), both

correlations became stronger. DBTP using WF instead of F correlated higher with life satisfaction

(r = -.540, p < .001) and mindfulness (r = -.455, p < .001) than the usual DBTP using the F scale.

The increase in life satisfaction and mindfulness is not only due to the correlations between these

constructs with WF, but also because including WF and excluding F, both increases the impact of

PH on the DBTP. The DBTP using WF instead of F (DBTPWF) correlates significantly to PH (r = -

.224, p < .05), while the usual DBTP using F does not significantly correlate to PH (r = -.107, p =

.237). This might be due to the negative correlation between F and PH (r = -.374, p < .001), which

in this sample was even stronger than the correlation between PP and PN (r = -.317, p < .001),

while the correlation between WF and PH is positive (r = .182, p < .05). Hence, when replacing F

by WF, the DBTP not only correlates stronger to life satisfaction and mindfulness, additionally, the

PH time frame gains more impact on the DBTP. See Table 9 for correlations between the DBTP

and the DBTPWF with the seven time frames, mindfulness and life satisfaction. The DBTPWF

might be a stronger predictor for life satisfaction and mindfulness than the DBTP. Simultaneously

the DBTPWF strengthens the present zone in two ways: by increasing the impact of PH and by

increasing the impact of mindfulness through the correlation between mindfulness and WF (r =

.364, p < .001).

Table 9

Correlations of the DBTPs with Life Satisfaction, Mindfulness and the Time Frames

M LS PP PN PH PF F WP WF

DBTP -.32*** -.45*** -.74*** .57*** -.11 .52*** -.34*** -.40*** -.32***

DBTPWF -.46*** -.54*** -.66*** .58*** -.22* .48*** -.24** -.51*** -.68***

NOTE: * P < .05. ** P < .01. *** P < .001; M = Mindfulness; LS = Life Satisfaction. DBTP = Deviant of a Balanced Time

Perspective (containing PP, PN, PH, PF and F); DBTPWF = altered DBTP (containing PP, PN, PH, PF and WF).

6. Discussion

The field of time perspective addresses individual differences in attitudes toward psychological

past, future and present. However, the field of mindfulness which can be described as the

psychology of the present is as of now strongly underrepresented in the field of time perspective.

The main purpose of the present study was to examine the relations between time perspectives and

(facets of) mindfulness and by this bringing these two deeply related fields more closely together.

22

On theoretical level the main questions were (1) Is the relation between mindfulness and time

perspectives so strong that by intervention increased mindfulness is accompanied by improved

relations to the past and the future and (2) How are the correlations between time perspectives and

facets of mindfulness, which are acting with awareness, observing, describing, non-judging of inner

experience and non-reactivity to inner experience. On practical level the main question was (3) Is

there, based on the findings for question (2) another possible composition of time perspective scales

that could be used when measuring an ideal, healthy or balanced time perspective, aiming at

including the concept of mindfulness to a higher degree. The pool of considered time perspective

scales was conducted by the subscales of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI:

Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999) and the Balanced Time Perspective Scale (BTPS: Webster, 2011).

Furthermore, participants completed the Five-facet Mindfulness Questionnaire – Short Form

(FFMQ-SF: Bohlmeijer, ten Klooster, Fledderus, Veehof, & Baer, 2011) and the Satisfaction with

Life Scale (SWLS: Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985).


(MBSR), associated to higher scores on the past and/or the future scales of the Balanced

Time Perspective Scale (BTPS) compared to a control group?

The students that recently finished a mindfulness training did not report to engage in positive

thinking about the past or the future more often than a control group. One possible explanation for

this is that mindfulness is not directly linked to positive thinking regarding one’s past and future.

However, mindfulness is a collection of skills that can take a long time to further develop, improve

and master. Further work is necessary to show if, in the long run, steady progress in mindfulness

will help people to develop better relations not only to the present, but to the past and the future as

well. Since, our existence lies in the present exclusively (Schopenhauer, 1890) and all thinking

concerning the past and the future can only be accomplished in the present (Webster, 2011), we still

assume that maintaining a mindful attitude helps people to get rid of stressful thoughts that are

attached to memories and expectation addressing the past and the future.



Regarding the correlations between time frames and life satisfaction, for the past negative time

frame the results of Zhang et al. (2012) could be replicated. Also the correlation between the past

23

positive (PP) time frame and life satisfaction replicates the findings of Zhang et al. (2012). The

findings of Zhang et al. (2012) regarding the correlations between future (F) and life satisfaction, as

well as the correlations between present fatalistic (PF) and life satisfaction could not be replicated

with the present sample. F and PF were not significantly correlated with mindfulness in the present

study. Also the strong correlation between the present hedonistic (PH) time frame and life

satisfaction is not consistent with the results of Zhang et al. (2012) who found very weak

correlations. Reasons for the differences between these findings may be due to cultural differences

between the samples and the relatively small sample size of the present study. Furthermore it is

possible that the Dutch version of the ZTPI used in this study, especially the PH subscale, may

trigger more positive associations due to differences in connotation structures that are language

inherent.

A negative view on one’s past is strongly connected to low mindfulness. This finding replicates the

results of Drake et al. (2008) and deepens them by adding information about relations between a

negative perception of the past and facets of mindfulness. Non-judging of inner experience, which

is a facet of mindfulness is the strongest link between mindfulness and a negative evaluation of

one’s past. Though it is unclear if judging oneself leads to a negative perception of one’s past or the

other way around, this link represents a connection between a mental activity and the representation

of memories. Besides, this finding is an example for the strongly intertwined relationship of two

time zones, namely the present and the past. A positive view on one’s past measured with the past

positive scale of the ZTPI was positively, but not significantly correlated with mindfulness. Drake

et al. (2008) found a significant correlation between the ZTPI past positive perspective and

mindfulness. That in the present study this correlation was not significant may be due to the smaller

sample size compared to Drake et al. (2008). The past scale of the BTPS was significantly

correlated to mindfulness. The past scale of the BTPS measures the propensity to think about one’s

past in positive ways and get positively inspired or motivated by these thoughts in the present, while

the past positive scale of the ZTPI measures a general positive evaluation of one’s past, that might

be accompanied by an attachment to tradition. The past scale of the BTPS might measure the ability

to use the past as a source of motivation for positive thinking in the present, while the past positive

scale of the ZTPI measures a positive relation to one’s past that probably emerges at the expense of

an unprepossessed attitude towards an ever fluctuating present. This might be explanatory for the

stronger connection between the past scale of the BTPS and mindfulness, compared to the past

positive scale of the ZTPI.

24

The future scale of the ZTPI was not significantly correlated with the overall construct of

mindfulness. This result replicates the findings of Drake et al. (2008). However, when not perceived

as an entity but divided into its facets, it seems that the overall construct of mindfulness contains

aspects that correlate positively with the Zimbardo future scale while others correlate negatively

with it. The future scale of the ZTPI measures an attitude toward the future which strives after

accomplishing goals, getting work done on time and fulfilling one’s responsibilities. It seems that

this conscientious kind of relation to one’s future is associated to acting with awareness and judging

of inner experience. In contrast to the future scale of the ZTPI, the future scale of the BTPS does

not significantly correlate with the mindfulness subscales non-judging of inner experience and

acting with awareness, but it is associated to the skill of observing one’s environment consciously,

to non-reactivity to inner experience and to the skill of describing one’s thoughts, emotions and

other inner processes, even when being in stressful situations. Especially the mindfulness facet

describing is associated to positive mental health (Bohlmeijer et al., 2011). According to Bohlmeijer

et al. (2011) acting with awareness and non-judging of inner experience have quite similar negative

correlations with neuroticism, anxiety and depression and a positive correlation with positive

mental health. Thus when compared on their relations to facets of mindfulness, the advantage the

future scale of the ZTPI has over the future scale of the BTPS, which is its positive association to

acting with awareness can probably not really display its positive implications for mental health,

since these are counteracted by a tendency to judge one’s inner experience.

A fatalistic attitude (toward the present), which is characterized by a lack of belief in one’s own

ability to influence the conditions of one’s environment and life circumstances, is negatively

associated to mindfulness. This finding replicates the results of Drake et al. (2008). It negatively

correlated to non-judging of inner experience, describing and acting with awareness. These findings

are consistent with the characterization of a fatalistic attitude, since, when all processes a person is

involved in, are determined by forces that are exclusively located outside of the individual, inner

experiences that are inconsistent with the tide of events are likely to be judged by the individual and

might be interpreted as disturbing its functioning. Hence, there is also no need to become skilled in

describing these inner processes that are experienced as distracting and hindering. Alike, when all

acting of the fatalistic individual is perceived as not leading to noticeable consequences, it seems

unnecessary to act with much awareness. Like the past negative scale, the present fatalistic scale has

only negative relations to mindfulness and therefore remains an exclusively unhealthy time

perspective. However, the correlation with the mindfulness facet observing might be positive.

Though, most of the present results are quite comparable to the findings of Drake et al. (2008),

the positive correlation of a hedonistic perspective on the present with mindfulness stands in

25

contradiction to the results of Drake et al. (2008), who found a negative correlation. Consequently,

this correlation remains questionable and might be sample dependent. These contrary results may be

due to differences in demographic variables of the participants such as age, life background or

nationality. The present study only recruited students, while Drake et al. (2008) recruited

participants from a broader range of life background and age (16 to 83). Probably the correlation

between the present hedonistic time frame and mindfulness differs, depending on the current age of

the measured subject. Cultural differences may also play a role. In the Scottish sample of Drake et

al. (2008) the past negative and the present fatalistic time perspective were the strongest, while in

the present study, respondents scored higher on past positive, present hedonistic and future than on

past negative and present fatalistic. It might also be possible that the Dutch translation used in the

present study triggers positive connotations that do not occur in the English version. In the present

study the present hedonistic time perspective positively correlated with the mindfulness facets non-

judging of inner experience, observing and describing. A strong present hedonistic time perspective

is characterized by striving after immediate satisfaction of desires without concerning future

consequences. Facing this definition, it is not surprising that the present hedonistic time perspective,

in contrast to the future perspective of the ZTPI, positively correlates with non-judging of inner

experience. Furthermore it seems plausible that a person trained in enjoying the present has

developed some skills in consciously observing it. A person with a hedonistic attitude toward the

present, aiming at feeling well in the present moment, might also pay relatively high attention to his

or her inner processes, which could be associated to the ability of describing them.

In terms of concurrent validity, as expected, the highest correlation of the past scale of the BTPS

with the ZTPI was its correlation to the past positive scale of the ZTPI. The highest correlation of

the future scale of the BTPS with the ZTPI was its correlation to the future scale of the ZTPI.

However, the future scale of the BTPS did not correlate higher with the future scale of the ZTPI

than the past scale of the BTPS. One could point out that the past scale of the BTPS and the future

scale of the ZTPI are supplementing each other, representing an attitude, which strives after

accomplishing personal successes in an anticipated future, with the result that a past will be created

that functions as a source of motivation and identity. However, the same might be true for the

relation between the past and the future scale of the BTPS, which showed the highest

intercorrelation of all time perspectives.




26

Characterizing the concept of a balanced time perspective (BTP), Zimbardo states that ‘in an

optimally balanced time perspective, the past, present and future components blend and flexibly

engage, depending on a situation’s demands and our needs and values’ (Zimbardo, 2002: 62 ). We

assume that mindfulness and the skills summed up by the five facets observing, describing, non-

judging of inner experience, non-reactivity to inner experience and acting with awareness, provide

the abilities that are necessary to develop a state of consciousness, that helps people to detect the

situational demands and to voluntarily switch one’s focus among past, present and future, based on

conscious knowledge about the situation and one’s own needs and values, leading to a highly self-

determined manner of (re)acting in the moment. The most popular manner of measuring BTP is

based on using the full ZTPI (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999) that contains the subscales present

hedonistic, present fatalistic, past negative, past positive and future. The BTPS (Webster, 2011)

contains an alternative past (positive) and an alternative future scale. Both of them showed validity

and excellent scale score reliability (Webster, 2011), as well as higher correlations with (facets of)

mindfulness than the past positive scale and the future scale of the ZTPI in the present study. The

past scale of the BTPS was more strongly connected to (facets of) mindfulness than the past

positive scale of the ZTPI. However, it did not correlate more strongly with life satisfaction than the

past positive scale of the ZTPI. The future scale of the BTPS was more strongly connected to

(facets of) mindfulness, as well as to life satisfaction than the future scale of the ZTPI. For this

reason we chose to just replace the future scale of the ZTPI by the future scale of the BTPS. The

deviant of a balanced time perspective (DBTP) measures the distance between one’s time

perspective and a balanced time perspective (BTP). Thus a negative correlation of the DBTP with

another construct indicates a positive correlation of BTP with that construct. The DBTP, using the

full ZTPI, as expected, correlated negatively with mindfulness and life satisfaction. However when

the future scale of the ZTPI was replaced by the future scale of the BTPS, both correlations became

stronger. We therefore conclude that, when measuring BTP, replacing the ZTPI future scale by the

BTPS future scale is a first step when aiming at strengthening the role that mindfulness plays in the

field of (balanced) time perspective.

Since the character of this study is explorative, it has to be investigated if the correlations between

the altered DBTP and correlates of well-being remain stronger than the correlations between the

unaltered DBTP and correlates of well-being, within other samples. Possibly, future studies will

find weaker increases in correlations to life satisfaction and mindfulness when replacing the

Zimbardo future scale with the Webster future scale, since in the present sample, the present

hedonistic time frame (which gains more impact on the DBTP when the Zimbardo future scale is

27

removed) seems to have an extraordinarily high correlation with life satisfaction compared to Zhang

et al. (2011) and Zhang et al. (2012), as well as extraordinarily good relations to mindfulness,

compared to Drake et al. (2008).

One could have the impression that we argue for a complete replacement of the future scale of

the ZTPI. In fact that is not the case. The two future scales can supplement each other when

respondents complete both of them. Since the future scale of the BTPS measures the healthiness of

an affectionate relation with one’s future, the ZTPI future scale measures how conscientiously one

behaves when aiming at accomplishing future goals. A high score on the ZTPI future scale

combined with a low score on the BTPS future scale might indicate an unhealthy relation to the

future that is based on a duteous attitude and a reward dependence that cannot really become

satisfied. However, when both scores are high, one can assume that that result indicates a positive,

affectionate relation to the future, which is accompanied by the time management skills that are

necessary to fulfill one’s high expectations regarding the future.

6.7 Strengths and Limitations

The present study is the first one which compares the whole ZTPI to the BTPS and as far as we

know the second study examining the relations between time perspectives and mindfulness. The

sample size was quite small. Probably some correlations that were not significant will become

significant in a greater sample. For example this could be the case for the correlation between the

past positive scale of the ZTPI with mindfulness and for the correlation of the present fatalistic

perspective with the mindfulness facet observing. Since the character of this study is explorative, it

has to be investigated if the correlations between the altered DBTP and correlates of well-being

remain stronger than the correlations between the unaltered DBTP and correlates of well-being,

within a larger sample. Possibly, future studies will find weaker increases in correlations to life

satisfaction and mindfulness when replacing the Zimbardo future scale with the Webster future

scale, since, in the present sample, the present hedonistic time frame (which gains more impact on

the DBTP when the Zimbardo future scale is removed) seems to have an extraordinarily high

correlation with life satisfaction compared to Zhang et al. (2011) and Zhang et al. (2012), as well as

extraordinarily good relations to mindfulness, compared to Drake et al. (2008). The decision to set

the assumed ideal value for the future scale of the BTPS to the highest value possible was not based

on earlier research. Possibly a slightly less high value would be more appropriate. Another

drawback is that the MBSR group did not complete the ZTPI. Since these subjects were participants

in another study (De Kleine, Van de Lubbe, Blom, Schreurs, & Bohlmeijer, in prep.), which was

already in progress, under ethical considerations it was difficult to give these people a huge

28

additional amount of items, which they did not expect to be given, when signing up for

participation.

Furthermore, it is important to give respondents clear instructions about how to fill in time

perspective questionnaires. One respondent in the present study stated that he has recently

experienced a life- and personality changing event and therefore was not sure which perspective he

should choose when rating the items, his present perspective or the perspective that mostly

determined the present conditions of his life. Furthermore, some students of the art academy

criticized that a person who frequently reflects on what he or she does, can easily give any possible

answer to some of the TP items, while still answering honestly, simply determined by the arbitrary

choice of where he or she puts the social reference point. Some respondents reported that the time

one takes to reflect upon an item can influence the answer and therefore respondents have to receive

clear instructions about how fast one should rate the items.

6.8 Future

In the beginning Zimbardo and Boyd included a 'present-holistic' (which actually equals

mindfulness) subscale, but rejected it due to lack of intercultural validity (Zimbardo & Boyd, 2008),

which reflects the difficulties of designing a valid instrument for measuring mindfulness across

cultures (Christopher, Christopher, & Charoensuk, 2009). Thus combining TP with mindfulness is

not a new idea but reaches back to the times of the development of the ZTPI. We argue that

mindfulness is a crucial key variable when it comes to the question of how to reshape one’s time

perspective aiming at improving subjective well-being (see also Drake et al., 2008). Since our

relations to the past and the future are constructs made by us in the present, their construction is an

enduring process open to goal directed intervention. Mindfulness is a state of increased awareness

for inner and outer processes and is characterized by a reflective not reflexive manner of responding

to stimuli. Therefore, we assume mindfulness to be crucial to detect one’s own time perspectives, to

understand them and to feel their consequences on one’s personal life, not only once by seeing the

results of a questionnaire, but over and over again in the very moment, when a time frame bias

shows its impact on one’s everyday life. Further studies are necessary to investigate long term

effects of mindfulness trainings on time perspectives.

Qualitative case studies are necessary to get deeper insight into the mechanisms of time

perspectives and the interactions between particular time frames. Another question is how

philosophical beliefs about time and afterlife time, the time zone, which Boyd and Zimbardo (1997)

refer to as the transcendental future, manifest themselves in everyday life. Time perspective

differences and similarities between genders, religions, nations, cultures and subcultures should be

29

explored as a matter of the enhancement of intercontextual comprehension and communication. In

this study native Dutch speakers scored higher on positive thinking toward the future, while native

German speakers scored higher on a negative perspective toward the past. Additionally native

Dutch speakers scored higher on the mindfulness facet non-reactivity to inner experience, though

they did not report to have more experience with meditation. Further studies are necessary to

investigate whether these findings are repeatable. The character of the present study was explorative

and its generalizability should be treated with caution. However, time perspective and mindfulness

are deeply related fields that can inspire and further develop each other to a high degree. Time

perspective based therapy methods and mindfulness based therapy methods can merge and by this

broaden and further develop the practical applications of (positive) time psychology.

30

References

Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report

assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27-45.

Baer, R. A., Smith G. T., Lykins, E., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S. et al. (2008). Construct

validity of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in meditating and nonmeditating samples.

Assessment, 15, 329-342.

Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L., & Anderson, N. D. et al. (2004). Mindfulness: A

proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11, 230–241.

Bohlmeijer, E. T., ten Klooster, P. M., Fledderus, M., Veehof, M. M., & Baer, R. (2011).

Psychometric properties of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in depressed adults and

development of a short form. Assessment, 8(3), 308-320.

Boniwell, I., Osin, E., Linley, P. A., & Ivanchenko, G. V. (2010). A question of balance: Time

perspective and well-being in British and Russian samples. The Journal of Positive Psychology,

5(1), 24-40.

Boniwell, I., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2004). Balancing time perspective in pursuit of optimal

functioning. In P.A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice, (165-179).

New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Boyd, J. N., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1997). Constructing time after death: The transcendental-future

time perspective. Time and Society, 6(1), 35-54.

Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in

psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822-848.

Bryant, F. B., Smart, C. M., King, S. (2005). Using the past to enhance the present: Boosting

happiness through positive reminiscence. Journal of Happiness Studies, 6, 227-260.

Cappeliez, P., O'Rourke, N., & Chaudhury, H. (2005). Functions of Reminiscence and Mental

Health in Later Life. Aging Ment Health, 9(4), 295-301.

Christopher, M. S., Christopher, V., & Charoensuk, S. (2009). Assessing “Western” Mindfulness

among Thai Theravāda Buddhist Monks. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 12(3), 303-314.

De Bruin, E. I., Topper, M., Muskens, J. G., Bögels, S. M., & Kamphuis, J. H. (2012).

Psychometric Properties of the Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) in a Meditating

and a Non-Meditating Sample. Assessment, 19(2), 187-97.

Dickey, S. (1975). Carreer Orientation, Future Time perspective, And Internality In College

Women (Doctoral Dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (UMI NO.

7527398)

31

Diener, E., Emmons, R., Larsen, J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale.

Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75.

Drake, L., Duncan, E., Sutherland, F., Abernethy, C., & Henry, C. (2008). Time Perspective and

Correlates of Wellbeing. Time & Society, 17(1), 47–61.

Einstein, A. (1905). Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper. Annalen der Physik, 17: 891.

Epel, E. S., Bandura A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1999). Escaping Homelessness: The Influence of the

Self-efficacy and Time Perspective on Coping with Homelessness. Journal of Applied Social

Psychology, 29, 575–596.

Fernandez, A. C., Wood, M. D., Stein, L. A. R., & Rossi, J. S. (2010). Measuring mindfulness and

examining its relationship with alcohol use and negative consequences. Psychology of

Addictive Behaviors, 24(4), 608-616.

Gottman, J. M. (1993). The roles of conflict engagement, escalation, and avoidance in marital inter-

action: A longitudinal view of five types of couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychol-

ogy, 61, 6-15.

Gottman, J. M. (1994). What predicts divorce? Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.

Grossman, P., Niemann, L., Schmidt, S., & Walach, H. (2004). Mindfulness-based stress reduction

and health benefits. A meta-analysis. Psychosom Res, 57, 35-43.

Guarino, A., De Pascalis, V., & Di Chiacchio, C. (1999). Breast Cancer Prevention, Time

Perspective, and Trait Anxiety. Unpublished manuscript, University of Rome.

Ivanovski, B., & Malhi, G. S. (2007). The psychological and neurophysiological concomitants of

mindfulness forms of meditation. Acta Neuropsychiatrica, 19, 76–91.

James, W. (1950). The Principles of Psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Dover. (Original work

published 1890)

Kabat-Zinn, J. (1982). An outpatient program in behavioral medicine for chronic pain patients

based on the practice of mindfulness meditation: Theoretical considerations and preliminary

results. General Hospital Psychiatry, 4(1), 33–47.

Kant, I., (2000). Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Essen: Mundus Verlag. (Original work published 1781)

Klingeman, H. (2001). The Time Game: Temporal Activity on Emotional Well-being Among Older

Australian Women: Cross-sectional and Longitudinal Analysis. Time & Society, 10(2-3), 302-

328.

LeDoux, J. (1998). The Emotional Brain. New York: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.

Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory in the Social Sciences: Selected Theoretical Papers. New York:

Harper.

32

Neto, F. (1993). The Satisfaction with Life Scale: Psychometrics Properties in an Adolescent

Sample. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 22(2), 125-134.

Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychological

Assessment, 5(2), 164-172.

Pavot, W., Diener, E., Colvin, C., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further validation of the Satisfaction With

Life Scale: Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being measures. J Personal ity

Assessment, 57(1), 149-161.

Schopenhauer, A. (1999). Parerga und Paralipomena (Vol. 1). Essen: Mundus Verlag. (Original

work published 1890)

Shapiro, S. L., & Carlson, L.E. (2009). The Art and Science of Mindfulness: Integrating

Mindfulness Into Psychology and the Helping Professions. Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association.

Shevlin, M., Brunsden, V., & Miles, J. (1998). Satisfaction With Life Scale: Analysis of factorial

invariance, mean structures and reliability. Person Individ Diff, 25(5), 911-16.

Stolarski, M., Bitner, J., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2011). Time perspective, emotional intelligence and

discounting of delayed awards. Time & Society, 20(3), 346-363.

Stratham, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., & Edwards, C. S. (1994). The Consideration of Future

Consequences: Weighing Immediate and Distant Outcomes of Behaviour. Journal of

Personality and Abnormal Psychology, 66, 742–52.

Szpunar, K. K. (2010). Episodic future thought: An emerging concept. Perspectives on

Psychological Science, 5, 142-162.

Trommsdorff, G., Lamm, H., & Schmidt, R.W. (1978). A Longitudinal Study of Adolescents'

Future Orientation (Time Perspective). Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 8 (2).

Vaish, A., Grossmann, T., & Woodward, A. (2008). Not all emotions are created equal: The

negativity bias in social-emotional development. Psychological Bulletin, 134(3), 383-403.

Webster, J. D. (1998). Attachment styles, reminiscence functions, and happiness in young and

elderly adults. Journal of Aging Studies, 12, 315-330.

Webster, J. D. (2011). A new measure of time perspective: Initial psychometric findings for the

Balanced Time Perspective Scale (BTPS). Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue

canadienne des sciences du comportement, 43(2), 111-118.

Webster, J. D., Bohlmeijer, E. T., & Westerhof, G. J. (2010). Reminiscence: Recent progress in

conceptual understanding, empirical study and implications for practice. Ageing & Society. 30,

697–721.

33

Webster, J. D., & Cappeliez, P. (1993). Reminiscence and autobiographical memory: Complemen-

tary contexts for cognitive aging research. Developmental Review, 13(1), 54-91.

Williams, L. M., Liddell, B. J., Kemp, A. H., Bryant, R. A., Maeres, R. A., Peduto, A. S., &

Gordon, E., (2006). Amygdala-prefrontal dissociation of subliminal and supraliminal fear.

Human Brain Mapping, 27(8), 652-661.

Yang, E., Zald, D. H., & Blake, R. (2007). Fearful expressions gain preferential access to awareness

during continuous flash suppression. Emotion, 7(4), 882-886.

Zhang, J. W., Ryan, T., & Howell, R. T. (2011) Do time perspectives predict unique variance in life

satisfaction beyond personality traits? Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 1261 – 1266.

Zhang, J. W., Howell, R. T., & Stolarski, M. (2012). Comparing Three Methods to Measure a

Balanced Time Perspective: The Relationship between a Balanced Time Perspective and

Subjective Well-Being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13, 1-16.

Zimbardo, P. G. (2002). ‘Just think about it: Time to take our time’. Psychology Today, 35, 62.

Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-

difference metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288.

Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (2008). The Time Paradox. New York: Free Press, Simon &

Schuster.

Zimbardo, P. G., Keough, K. A., & Boyd, J. N. (1997). Present Time Perspective as a predictor of

risky driving. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 1007–1023.

34

Appendix Dutch version of the ZTPI: 1. Ik vind gezellig bij elkaar komen met vrienden één van de leukste dingen in het leven. 2. Vertrouwde plaatsen, geluiden en geuren uit mijn kinderjaren brengen een stroom van mooie herinneringen bij me naar boven. 3. Het noodlot bepaalt veel in mijn leven. 4. Ik denk vaak aan wat ik anders had moeten doen in mijn leven. 5. Mijn beslissingen worden meestal beïnvloed door mensen en dingen rondom mij. 6. Het is het beste om elke ochtend de dag goed te plannen. 7. Ik denk met plezier aan mijn verleden. 8. Ik doe dingen impulsief. 9. Ik maak me geen zorgen als dingen niet op tijd af zijn. 10. Als ik iets wil bereiken, stel ik eerst doelen en bedenk specifieke manieren om deze doelen te bereiken. 11. Over het algemeen heb ik meer goede dan slechte herinneringen aan mijn verleden. 12. Ik vergeet vaak volledig de tijd als ik naar mijn favoriete muziek luister. 13. Het is belangrijker om op tijd het werk dat de volgende dag gereed moet zijn, en andere noodzakelijke taken, af te maken dan om ’s avonds te ontspannen. 14. Omdat dingen gaan, zoals ze gaan, maakt het niet echt uit wat ik doe. 15. Ik geniet van verhalen over de goede oude tijd. 16. Pijnlijke ervaringen uit het verleden blijven zich in mijn hoofd afspelen. 17. Ik probeer alles uit het leven te halen, van dag tot dag. 18. Ik raak van streek als ik te laat ben op afspraken. 19. Idealiter zou ik elke dag leven alsof het mijn laatste was. 20. Gelukkige herinneringen aan goede tijden komen makkelijk bij me op. 21. Ik kom op tijd mijn verplichtingen na aan vrienden en belangrijke mensen. 22. Ik heb vroeger mijn portie misbruik en afwijzing wel gehad. 23. Ik neem beslissingen op het moment zelf. 24. Ik neem liever elke dag zoals die komt in plaats van hem helemaal te plannen. 25. Het verleden heeft teveel onaangename herinneringen waar ik er liever niet aan denk. 26. Het is belangrijk spanning te creëren in mijn leven. 27. Ik heb in het verleden fouten gemaakt die ik graag ongedaan zou maken. 28. Ik vind het belangrijker te genieten van waar je mee bezig bent, dan op tijd met je werk klaar te zijn. 29. Ik word nostalgisch als ik aan mijn kinderjaren denk. 30. Ik overweeg de kosten en baten voor ik een beslissing neem. 31. Risico’s nemen zorgt ervoor dat mijn leven niet saai wordt . 32. Ik vind het belangrijker om van mijn levensreis te genieten dan me enkel op de eindbestemming te richten. 33. De zaken verlopen zelden zoals ik had verwacht. 34. Ik vind het moeilijk om onplezierige beelden uit mijn jeugd te vergeten. 35. Ik haal minder vreugde uit datgene wat ik doe, als ik aan doelen, uitkomsten en resultaten moet denken. 36. Zelfs wanneer ik geniet van het moment, vergelijk ik de dingen met soortgelijke ervaringen uit het verleden. 37. Je kunt niet echt plannen maken voor de toekomst omdat de dingen zoveel veranderen. 38. Mijn levenspad wordt beheerst door krachten waar ik geen invloed op heb. 39. Het heeft geen zin me zorgen te maken over de toekomst , omdat ik er toch niets aan kan doen. 40. Ik maak projecten op tijd af door stap voor stap vooruitgang te boeken. 41. Ik merk dat ik afhaak als familieleden praten over hoe het vroeger was. 42. Ik neem risico’s om opwinding in mijn leven te creëren. 43. Ik maak lijstjes van wat ik nog moet doen. 44. Vaak volg ik meer mijn hart dan mijn verstand. 45. Ik kan verleidingen weerstaan als ik weet dat er nog werk te doen is. 46. Ik laat mezelf gaan in de opwinding van het moment . 47. Het leven van vandaag is te ingewikkeld; ik heb liever het meer eenvoudige leven van vroeger. 48. Ik heb liever spontane vrienden dan voorspelbare vrienden. 49. Ik hou van familierituelen en tradities die zich regelmatig herhalen.

35

50. Ik denk aan de slechte dingen die me in het verleden zijn overkomen. 51. Ik blijf werken aan moeilijke, oninteressante taken als deze me helpen vooruit te komen in het leven. 52. Vandaag genieten van mijn loon, is beter dan te sparen voor de zekerheid van morgen. 53. Vertrouwen op geluk loont vaak meer dan hard werken. 54. Ik denk aan de goede dingen die ik ben misgelopen in mijn leven. 55. Ik hou van passie in mijn intieme relaties. 56. Er is altijd genoeg tijd om mijn werk in te halen.

vowinckel-psychologicaltime

Documents